CDC Unpublished Data Comparing Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated Obtained via FOIA [pdf]

childrenshealthdefense.org

4 points·mindfulgeek··4 comments

The title is essentially clickbait... which doesn't negate the content.

I didn't go through and look at all of them, but here are 4 of the source studies which certainly didn't require any FOIA. https://doi.org/10.1080/02772240701806501 https://doi.org/10.1080/15287394.2010.519317 https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/54/12/1778/455098 https://www.ebiomedicine.com/article/S2352-3964(17)30046-4/a...

Most of the slides are cherrypicked articles in PubMed. Is there some new information?

The slides that state they were unpublished and obtained via FOIA. The first slide is one example and there are more as you scroll.

The first one is the abstract of:

> Verstraeten, T., Davis, R. L., Gu, D., & DeStefano, F. (2000). Increased risk of developmental neurologic impairment after high exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccine in first month of life. In Proceedings of the Epidemic Intelligence Service Annual Conference (Vol. 49). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

If you want a better link to read it: http://mercury-freedrugs.org/docs/00mmdd_EISAbstractSubmissi...

I thinks it's not necessary to get if by a FOIA. Asking nicely for the 2000 year proceeding should be enough.

It's not unpublished data of the CDC. Someone send a poster or small presentation for a conference. The peer review before the conference varies a lot, in some conferences it is very strict, in other it is almost inexistent. Is the full data analysis published somewhere?

They found ~4000 kids with problems. How many unvaccinated kids with problems can you find in Canada in the '90 to compare?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com